Introductory Note: Over the next few weeks, a series of posts here will examine the credibility of the administration's response to questions about Bush's military service.
In his February 2004 "Meet the Press" appearance, Bush promised to release all records related to his military service. He then quickly added that he had already done so during the 2000 campaign. To try to back up Bush's statements, the White House released over 400 pages of documents to the White House press corps on Friday evening, February 13, 2004. While this document shower succeeded in drowning press interest in Bush's service record, a simple document inventory shows the contents of the files released by the White House directly contradict representations made in 2000 by the Bush campaign. The inventory also shows a key document is now missing from Bush's archived personnel file.
The February 2004 document release consisted of three personnel files (see note 1 below):
- Texas Air National Guard (TXANG) Personnel File
- National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) 2000 File
- National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) 2004 File
Both the TXANG file and the NRPC 2000 file contain a document in unexpectedly good condition. Each file has an un-torn copy of page two of Bush's `72-`73 AF Form 526, titled "ARF Statement of Points Earned" (2). These are un-torn versions of the infamous torn document peddled by the 2000 campaign as evidence Bush "served in Alabama". Un-torn versions of Form 526 in files allegedly dating from 2000 deserve explanation by the White House. If the un-torn copy was available in 2000, why wasn't it offered to the press? And if the un-torn copy wasn't available in 2000, why is the White House now indicating it was?
The picture gets even murkier. There is no copy of the `72-`73 Form 526 -- torn or un-torn -- in the NPRC 2004 personnel file. The two un-torn copies present in the 2000 NPRC personnel file are now missing from the file. The White House has offered no explanation for why the contents of an archived personnel file -- theoretically frozen since Bush's discharge in 1974 -- have changed (3). While it's possible these inconsistencies are a thread that when pulled will unravel an elaborate cover-up; a mundane bureaucratic explanation is just as likely. But whatever the explanation, the Bush White House shows itself not in the least bit concerned about offering inconsistent information when defending the president. One can't help but suspect a deliberate strategy to overwhelm the press with nonsense, so that the truth never stands much chance of a public airing.
The document avalanche has left the false impression that all information relevant to Bush's service has been released. The following is just a preliminary list of the known information that has not been fully disclosed:
- Personnel records (no waiver signed to release directly to public)
- Unit records from TXANG and ALANG (unreleased)
- Flight records (unreleased)
- Medical records (partially released) (4)
- Payroll records (partially released)
- Tax returns (unreleased)
The selective release of documents is pure folly. Without a waiver allowing the public direct access to files, no one will ever know if the complete files have been released. In fact, two known documents -- previously acknowledged by the Bush 2000 campaign -- are absent from all the files (5). Selective document releases do nothing to shore up the credibility of a credibility-challenged administration.
The issue of Bush's military service goes beyond what he did as a soldier in the Seventies. What the president and his staff said and implied during the 2000 campaign and thereafter deserve careful scrutiny. Even with the selective disclosure of documents, evidence is accumulating that White House statements and actions have served to conceal uncomfortable details about his service. It's one thing if Bush side-stepped his duty as a twenty-six year-old but it's an order of magnitude more serious for him to undermine his credibility while President of the United States.
Notes:
(1) The documents were released to the press not the public. Thanks to USA Today we can examine
them. Our analysis assumes USA Today kept the documents in the manner the WH released them. The WH provided no detailed information as to when the documents were collected or a roster of the documents released.
(2) Page two of the `72-`73 form 526 has a rich history and at least 6 distinct reproductions have surfaced. The first reproduction of a torn version is from a George magazine article. Martin Heldt obtained a reproduction of the same torn document but without all the handwriting. Bob Fertik obtained the first un-torn version. On 2/10/04 the White house released an un-torn version distinct from that obtained by Bob Fertik. There are four reproductions in the personnel files released 2/13/04.
I. TXANG file, page 16
II. NPRC 2000 file, page 6
III. NPRC 2000 file , page 9
IV. TXANG file, page 15
The three un-torn reproductions -- I, II, III -- all are distinct due to distinguishing markings. II appears to be a duplicate of the reproduction released on 2/10/04 by the White House. The torn copy, IV, appears to be a duplicate of the document obtained by Martin Heldt.
(3) Here is a page analysis of the two NPRC Personnel file versions:
NPRC File in 2000
- 103 Total Pages
- 1 Cover Page
- 7 Duplicate Pages
- 1 Triplicate Page (reduce page count by 2)
- 93 Unique original document pages
NPRC File in 2004
- 104 Total Pages
- 1 Cover Page
- 8 Duplicate Pages (4 exact duplicates)
- 95 Unique original document pages
Original document pages are pages before distinguishing marks are added by hole punching, cropping, handwriting, reproduction or other handling.
(4) The WH has shown some military medical records briefly to WH reporters allegedly in deference to Bush's privacy. But if the WH wanted to really release "all the records" they could sign a waiver to release the Bush's medical records to the press under ground rules designed to protect his privacy. This approach would allow access to all Bush's military medical records and give the press sufficient time to carefully study the records.
(5) Two special orders from TXANG ordering Bush to active duty are missing from the personnel files. Both these orders have been acknowledged to exist in this memo circulated by the 2000 Bush Campaign. SO AE-108-TX April 23, 1973 was obtained by George Magazine but no copy survives on the web. Payroll records suggest the correct order number may be AE-198 not AE-108. SO AE-226-TX MAY 1, 1973 was obtained through an FOIA request by Martin Heldt.